You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Comments are definitely important.
I see two main ways of doing this:
1 - Have an all-encompassing comment type, that can reference any other type of entry either by IDRef, or association by similar enough datetime
2 - Include a comment/description field as a standard for all the types of entries or only certain ones.
I kind of think #1 makes sense from a data modelling point of view, but it may be more difficult to maintain, and I'm not sure if we want to worry about IDs (other than patient/timestamp).. part of the flexibility of JSON etc is not having to worry about incrementing/creating an ID.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Instead of directly referencing other data entries, could the reference be time-based? That way a comment that says "Took Tylenol" could be laid over the CGM readings for a 4 hour period to indicate that all of those may be affected?
If the comment has to directly reference these as a pointer of some sort, then adding or removing comments places a certain burden on the database. In the example above it would reference about 50 other entities.
I agree. I think that makes most sense from a data modelling point of
view.. it's not our job to make connections.. it's the system's.
But does that same logic follow for things that are specifically related
like description of an exercise?
A way of dealing with that could be that notes have no explicit foreign key
relationship, but do have an optional categorization to apply to another
type of event.
Instead of directly referencing other data entries, could the reference be
time-based? That way a comment that says "Took Tylenol" could be laid over
the CGM readings for a 4 hour period to indicate that all of those may be
affected?
If the comment has to directly reference these as a pointer of some sort,
then adding or removing comments places a certain burden on the database.
In the example above it would reference about 50 other entities.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/3#issuecomment-13420779.
Comments are definitely important.
I see two main ways of doing this:
1 - Have an all-encompassing comment type, that can reference any other type of entry either by IDRef, or association by similar enough datetime
2 - Include a comment/description field as a standard for all the types of entries or only certain ones.
I kind of think #1 makes sense from a data modelling point of view, but it may be more difficult to maintain, and I'm not sure if we want to worry about IDs (other than patient/timestamp).. part of the flexibility of JSON etc is not having to worry about incrementing/creating an ID.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: